The devil was part of the Reformation

[Paris_Blues]

Or maybe the Reformation was a BIG WAKE UP CALL to the CC to say, get things under control or otherwise, this is what will happen…??? Like if people in the CC don’t get things back under control, people will stray away…which they did…and they did.

Eh?:ehh:

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Paris Blues:

Or maybe the Reformation was a BIG WAKE UP CALL to the CC to say, get things under control or otherwise, this is what will happen…??? Like if people in the CC don’t get things back under control, people will stray away…which they did…and they did.

Eh?:ehh:

Yes, I think it is certainly true that it was a wake up call, and I honestly think the Church has improved herself because of it.

As far as people straying, I don’t think the Reformation itself is any more to blame than the Church pre-Reformation. She set the stage. If the people who were “lost” are also lost from God, then I can’t say it was all Luther’s fault. Still, if we want to look at it that way, the Good Shepherd will LEAVE HIS OWN FLOCK and bring back the lost, so no matter what reason they strayed it’s up to the Church to get them back.

Back to the thread issue, if the question is whether satan had anything to do with the Reformation, then I say he certainly did, unless the corruption in the Church came from God and not satan.

Alan

 

[reen12]

quote: AlanFromWitchita

To imagine that these people left the Church lightly, I think would be to do them a disservice so surely you don’t mean they did not agonize over this, or went to another Church because the Bingo games were better there…

I must say, Alan, you do have a gift - when it comes to
putting things into perspective.

As far as other Christians being “led astray”:

----->that is a doctrinal viewpoint, surely not acknowledged
as ‘fact’ - by 3/4 billion non-Catholic Christians.

quote: AlanFromWitchita

…it will simply be another “notch” in the sword of goodness when all is over.

I think you’re…right. :tiphat:

reen

 

[Fides]

PLEASE READ
I am knowledgeable, but not enough to disuss the past events like you guys, so ill offer something different.

Pretend the journey to god is a bicycle ride. Everyone is on a bike, starting off in the same place, riding down the path, with the intention of arriving to god. Eventually, the paths split, the catholic path the straightest way to god. Obvisouly a left or right, protestant. Your riding along and you see acouple future protestants starting to make the move right for a turn. All the non believers (devil) are standing off the path watching, doing everything they can do distract our path. One non-believer throws a stick in thewheel of the protestant infront of you, and the protestant falls off their bike, face first on the ground. You have three choices as the a catholic. Laugh and ride by, acknowledge their situation but continue to ride, or get off the bike, help em up, and continue on their way.

Well once you reach god, unless you picked the 3rd option, you may expect to be questioned about it, no?

The person falling off the bike is the reformation. The devil doesnt have success until the reaction.

If you laugh and ride by, the devil is successful.
If you stop and lend a hand, the devil loses.

As I catholic, I believe our church is in the fullest of communion with god. To say the reformation is the product of the devil is saying that all the reformation produces is the devil as well.

Going back to the story, there are three people. Catholic riders, protestant riders, and the ones who dont even want a bike.

Even though the protestants are not taking the straightest path, they full intend to reach god.

I read a book written by a priest, cant remember the title or author, but he said something that will forever stay with me. How it is completely unnatural, unrealistic, to think that everyone could be the same religion, the same denomintation. Its against the principles of life.

Devil part of reformation?? I guess my point is that we shouldnt try to seek the negatives in protestantism, god knows there is enough on tv to make me shake my head everyday, but instead act as the leaders we should be, and maybe when we stop to help them back on their bike, they will follow us. If not, give em some water when they arrive alittle late, they may be tired.

God bless all !!

 

[Thal59]

Nice analogy, but you are assuming that Protestants will eventually make thier way to God, and that we should simply be charitable about it. You are not considering the possibility that many Protestants may lose thier salvation.

Look at it this way. To be a Protestant one must either be born out of the true church or choose to be seperate from it. If one is born out of it, one may have not received a valid Baptism. (Yes, there is always the case for a true “Baptism of the Spirit,” but the point is that Baptism outside of the church cannot be taken for granted.) One born out side of the church will also be more apt to have only a portion of the truth as they will almost certainly be a sola scripturist. This makes them prone to fallacious teachings if they happen to get a minister who is a real Lu-Lu. (Remember David Koresh?)

If someone “chooses” to be seperate from His church, they can be considered to be guilty of denying His church, denying the authority God gave it, rejecting the body and blood of Christ (Eucharist), rejecting His ministers, rejecting the grace that comes through the sacraments… etc., etc.

The problem is that we do not know how people, Catholic or Protestant, fare on the day of judgement. But a case can be made that one who is a Protestant are in more jeopardy than a Catholic. This is why I have a tendency to be a bit harsh, what some would call at times uncharitable, to Protestants. It is not out of hatred, or smugness, it is out of the realiztion that those people who follow Protestant(ism) may be in real trouble where their souls are concerned. If one understands that, then political correctness can be fatal.

But if indeed many Protestants should lose their souls for whatever reason, then one can certainly imply that Satan was behind it.

Thal59

 

[AlanFromWichita]

A Catholic and a Protestant make a bet as to which one’s church is the “true” Church. They agree that they will find an impartial judge to settle it.

Each side brings its apologists to present its case.

Who is to be the impartial judge? There is none because everyone who would vote on the issue has been influenced by his/her own religious upbringing and beliefs.

Unless one of them “blinks” then they will never settle it during their lifetimes.

How sad.

Alan

 

[Fides]

Thal59,

I indeed ended with a light note that they make it, I also made it as well.

With wisdom and knowledge comes responsibility. I think you would agree that majority of people who leave the catholic faith were really not spiritual at all, then when they felt they had an internal change, they ask where this feeling was when they were catholic. So off they go to new denomination.

Little do they prob know about the catholic faith, where their own new denomination comes from, or who put the bible together. I feel this seperates them from people who actually have the knowledge, and still leave the church.

I pretty much agree with you. I just want to highlight the idea that, lets say a protestant visits this forum today, with barely any knowledge of the divisions between cath. and pro. He reads this thread, xing out the page once he reads acouple posts about how satan may have created his religion. Now he runs along and tells all his church buddies what catholics really think about protestants!!!

Now would that be accurate? Of course not. And now false teachings would begin about catholics, and maybe future converts are now even more delayed?? Again, satan wins with reaction.

 

[Paris_Blues]

Singinbeauty:

As a side note… Paris, love ya to death sister but the more I read your posts the more I think you are just out for the blood of the protestants OR you are just trying to convice yourself that you have chosen the right path.

I’m at no target against Protestants. I’m sorry if I sound like that and I can sound harsh but I’m not out for, like you said, “the blood of protestants”, etc.

Either way, please just design your own anti-protestant website and be done with it.

Excuse me…I don’t design my own anti-Protestant websites thank you very much. How dare you even say such a thing like that!

By sitting here and just spouting off that we are protducts of the devil to your catholic friends you are just ‘gossiping’ rather than brainstorming on what to do to make things better. Your anti-protestant statements would be better if you were to ask at the end of them ‘how do we correct this’ or ‘what do we do to begin to heal this’ rather than just saying we are pawns of the devil because I keep waiting for the next line to be ‘and they should all burn in Hell’.

I’m NOT saying you Protestants are from the devil. I’m just saying the devil WAS probably part of the Reformation, etc. I HAVE NOTHING against them personally (and I don’t know how many times I have to say that!) but I have a problem with them rejecting the Fullness of Truth.

I give up…be decieved…I don’t give a dang anymore…

To make you happy, I’ll just keep my yap shut, k?

 

[Paris_Blues]

Strange…someone posted that I was attacking Protestants (not the case) and was “gossiping” too to my Catholic friends. Now it’s deleted. Hmmmmmm…

The point is people, how many times do I have to say I have NOTHING against our brethren though I have a problem with them rejecting the Fullness of Truth! Why? Because it’s the TRUTH!!! You’re better off having the FULLNESS of Truth than half Truth and that’s the truth. When one rejects the Fullness of Truth, that’s like saying, “I’m going to believe what I want to believe and there’s nothing you can do about that!” but when they accept the Fullness of Truth, wow, the other scale falls from the eyes and now you’re walking in full light! At least that how I myself experienced!

But seriously peoples, it’s not that I’m attacking here…I’m just making a point.

What am I suppose to do about it…keep my yap shut? I heard someone say that that’s what the devil or something likes…closed mouths.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Paris Blues:

Strange…someone posted that I was attacking Protestants (not the case) and was “gossiping” too to my Catholic friends. Now it’s deleted. Hmmmmmm…

The point is people, how many times do I have to say I have NOTHING against our brethren though I have a problem with them rejecting the Fullness of Truth! Why? Because it’s the TRUTH!!! You’re better off having the FULLNESS of Truth than half Truth and that’s the truth. When one rejects the Fullness of Truth, that’s like saying, “I’m going to believe what I want to believe and there’s nothing you can do about that!” but when they accept the Fullness of Truth, wow, the other scale falls from the eyes and now you’re walking in full light! At least that how I myself experienced!

But seriously peoples, it’s not that I’m attacking here…I’m just making a point.

What am I suppose to do about it…keep my yap shut? I heard someone say that that’s what the devil or something likes…closed mouths.

So my question to you is, what does the “fullness” get you that the contrasting “partial” there is elsewhere get you? Is it that the Church is so rich in many devotions that practically anybody can find ones that are suited toward their journey? Is it the Real Presence that most influences you?

Keeping in mind that you can be completely convinced that this full truth is correct, but others are equally convinced they are right. Given that situation, what is the best way to approach it?

One thing I like to do is to ask questions, and listen to try to understand their faith, then when it compares to Catholicism I can now and then nod and say, “yes, we believe that.” To the other parts I can either not comment, as strategy warrants, or comment thus, “that’s interesting. We think of it a different way.”

Be confident, but restrained in telling them, and listen to them. Soon they will see you as not only a wise person, but a fair judge. At that time you have reinforced those parts of what they said that are Catholic, and if you’re good you can get some Catholic teaching in too.

edit: the idea is to get them hearing you as a person who listens carefully and is wise; at that point they get curious about what you think, since you have now judged what they think and found it to be partly “in agreement” and partly “interesting.” This curiosity will call them more strongly than any attempt to tell them of their heresy IMO.

I think a key to one-on-one apologetics is that the stealth game is stronger than the one on top. The emotional undertones – does this person respect me – speak louder than what is actually said. Like St. Paul, I become like whoever I am with to win them, which is the quickest way to get them to Christ. If the Holy Spirit somehow calls them to the Church through your action, then that’s icing on the cake.

edit>> This took me a long time to learn, because I tended to listen to each thing a person said individually, and evaluate it separately. I think most people make up their mind whether you are a credible source, then on that basis either believe or don’t believe – so depending on which your audience is, gaining their trust may vary in importance.

Alan

 

[starrs0]

Satan is indeed behind Protestantism they have forsaken the Eucharist and thus have no real life in them. The have no real protection aganist the Devil and his lies

 

[SolaChristo]

starrs0:

Satan is indeed behind Protestantism they have forsaken the Eucharist and thus have no real life in them. The have no real protection aganist the Devil and his lies

That is patently false.
when Jesus was tempted of the devil in the wilderness He replied thre times: It is writtten. The best defense against the wiles of the devil i scripture.

 

[Little_Mary]

SolaChristo:

That is patently false.
when Jesus was tempted of the devil in the wilderness He replied thre times: It is writtten. The best defense against the wiles of the devil i scripture.

That is your interpretation and it is one of thousands.

 

[SolaChristo]

Little Mary:

That is your interpretation and it is one of thousands.

So Jesus did not show us by example?
Is not the word of God the sword of the spirit?

 

[reen12]

Catholicism is, as well, an “interpretation.”

The entire Reformation *centered *about the fidelity
of this interpretation of Scripture.

In my estimation, the Catholics got it right on the Eucharist,
and Luther got it right on…Scripture - particularly the
letters of St. Paul.

Neither “interpretation” is the ‘fulness of truth’ and - if the
Church lasts 20,000 years - then she is still in her infancy,
and…who knows? Maybe she will recover from the notion
of “infallibility” - at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.

reen12

 

[AlanFromWichita]

starrs0:

Satan is indeed behind Protestantism they have forsaken the Eucharist and thus have no real life in them. The have no real protection aganist the Devil and his lies

As I alluded to in an earlier post, you say this, they say that. These questions involve matters of faith, which by definition cannot be proven by earthly means. Not only can we not prove it, there would not be an impartial judge on this earth.

Therefore your statement has no meaning except in faith, and that faith varies from one holder to another.

You cannot say that we have “proven” any of this; we have accepted it in faith from other people who told the story and whose stories we have bought. When I say “bought” I understand that this can be very deep, where we have incorporated this faith into every fiber of our being. Still, when we believe in faith, we bought a story which has not, and cannot be, proven. Anything that can be proven does not require faith to believe.

It still comes down to each individual person. There just may be a “right” answer to many of these questions, but without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we do not have access to these truths. We can say, “when we die you shall see,” to which an intelligent reply is, “yes, but that’s just putting off your proof which you do not have.”

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I just thought of one way I think the Reformation has served Satan well.

It has turned many Catholics into intolerant, closed minded intellectual attack dogs who viciously turn on their brother because they don’t do their devotions the same way as ours, or because they pray to our God without being official members.

It just dawned on me that a “proper” Catholic attitude toward the entire Reformation is told in the one parable. It’s so important it appears in two Gospels:
Mark 9:

38 9 John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.” 39 Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me. 40 For whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward. 42 "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe (in me) to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

This is PRECISELY the situation we have, and we Catholics are rabid to make them stop what they are doing. Let’s try actually listening to Christ. Christ did not say, “well, you know those people with only Partial Truth are all lost.” No, he said they SURELY WILL NOT LOSE THEIR REWARD if they do good works in His name.

Now, let’s take it a step further. If you “succeed” in teaching a Protestant their faith they’ve held their whole life is bad and they should go against their parents and friends and leave their church – and maybe don’t make it so far as joining the Catholic Church – are we not subject to this curse of Jesus?

Let’s look at it again in a different gospel to see if it reinforces or trashes my point:
Luke 9:

47 Jesus realized the intention of their hearts and took a child and placed it by his side 48 and said to them, “Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me. For the one who is least among all of you is the one who is the greatest.” 49 Then John said in reply, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow in our company.” 50 Jesus said to him, “Do not prevent him, for whoever is not against you is for you.”

Why would these lessons be so closely juxtaposed? Could it be that we who think our faith is greater will be considered the least in the Kingdom of heaven?

I’m not saying this is the case, but I’m just providing a warning in line with my prophetic vocation not to get too arrogant. Arrogance is likely the mechanism that both caused the Reformation and that required it.

Arrogance is stoopid, and un-Christlike. The whole point of Christianity is to show people how to love each other in God – if treat each other badly in the name of religion then I’m not sure but that we’re blaspheming the Spirit. OK, so maybe not that but it can’t be a good thing. Christ did not give us a formula on how to love each other so that we can beat each other over the head with our varying copies of the formulary!

Can’t we just enjoy our faith and its richness without telling other people theirs will lead them to hell? This thinking was condemned as heresy a few decades ago but it is thoroughly in the psyche of Catholics all over the globe it seems. Oh yeah, we think we have to “sell” Catholicism the way an annoying, pesky, presumptuous salesman would I guess; we must not think the Holy Spirit is up to the job.

Those who still say that telling a lifelong Protestant their faith is all wet is an act of love, please reread my entire explanation above and especially meditate on the words of Christ in those to passages. If you don’t like what I say, go argue with Jesus about it because I’m just pointing out what He told us.

Alan

 

[Thal59]

reen12:

Catholicism is, as well, an “interpretation.”

The entire Reformation *centered *about the fidelity
of this interpretation of Scripture.

In my estimation, the Catholics got it right on the Eucharist,
and Luther got it right on…Scripture - particularly the
letters of St. Paul.

Neither “interpretation” is the ‘fulness of truth’ and - if the
Church lasts 20,000 years - then she is still in her infancy,
and…who knows? Maybe she will recover from the notion
of “infallibility” - at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.

reen12

To say… “Neither “interpretation” is the ‘fulness of truth’ …” is to call Christ a liar. He promised that His church would be guided by the Holy spirit who would “…recall to mind all that I have taught you, teach you all things, guide you into ALL truth, and be with you forever.”

Christ’s church MUST have the fullness of truth or it could not stand against the assaults of the devil. Protestants broke from this charism, and they are multiplied exceedingly.

Thal59

 

[Thal59]

AlanFromWichita:

The problem with your scriptural quotes is that the disciples of the Lord “testified” that they saw the man in question “Cast/Drive out demons in thy name.” The point is that this mystery man was not doing so of his own accord, but that he apparently had received such power and authority from God through the Holy Spirit.

In order to make the analogy apply to “Protestants” in general, one would have to show that they are empowered and authorized by God. Since they have broken away from the authorized faith, they cannot be authorized themselves as that would imply that God authorizes schism.

Thal59

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Thal59:

To say… “Neither “interpretation” is the ‘fulness of truth’ …” is to call Christ a liar. He promised that His church would be guided by the Holy spirit who would “…recall to mind all that I have taught you, teach you all things, guide you into ALL truth, and be with you forever.”

Christ’s church MUST have the fullness of truth or it could not stand against the assaults of the devil. Protestants broke from this charism, and they are multiplied exceedingly.

Thal59

So you are saying you know ALL truth because you are Catholic?

How can any one person know ALL truth? If they can’t, then really what difference does it make whether some bishop in Rome knows the part you don’t know or whether it’s a TV preacher from Los Angeles?

Even if Catholicism is Wal-Mart of truth and Presbyterians just run the Dollar General store on the corner, either store is capable of delivering nourishment to the table?

Do you refuse to learn anything from your boss of coworkers or other people unless they are Catholic in any other aspect of life than the “faith” one? If not, why not? What is wrong from learning lessons from ALL of God’s creatures?

If the “fullness of truth” were an objective fact that third parties could verify, then these questions would make sense.

The “truth” shouts out from even the rocks. Do you not think God can raise more of us from stones?

I will give this much toward the Church. I have found in my own spiritual journey that I have received many teachings from outsiders, and some are right and some turn out to be wrong, according to the Church. I have received many teachings from insiders, and some have turned out to be wrong.

The problem with the Church, given she contains the fullness of truth, is she doesn’t seem to be able to get that truth to a place and format that the sheep can consume and digest. I’m not talking about the Sacraments here, but the teachings and the mysticism that she has hidden in the cloisters that very few people know about. She does, indeed, have a very rich set of teachings and in fact does have the mysticism (and even enthusiasm in places) that “other” denominations and even Eastern religions have – and I think it’s better because it’s OURS. For those reasons, I have been impressed at the depth of the Church, but woefully disappointed at her inability to feed the sheep what they need.

A few sheep really go looking deeper, and once in a rare while the Church extends mystical teachings to them. The mainstream, though, is a lot of behavioral, historical, and dogmatic teaching and NOTHING about mysticism except to go “gee whiz” and “ooh aah” over the saints.

Therefore our religion does contain everything one needs, IMO, to find peace, but it isn’t always there. It’s like, if a Catholilc child in a store is lost and crying, and a couple non-denominational preachers and maybe a Protestant or two come across that child, do you want them to help him find his way home or would you have trained that child never to listen to strangers because they don’t the Whole Truth about what you believe?

Alan